The IC measurement systems all serve, in their unique ways, to ground ICM in the everyday reality of business and to monitor the achievement of projected goals. Over time, this can transform organizational behavior and routines and equip top and frontline management to appreciate the value of IC both internally and externally. But the question remains: Does the IC model offer more than the creation of a new IC vocabulary? Does it provide more than the general contention that management should give more attention to the development of their IC? Does the IC model provide guidance as to how IC can be managed in a business to yield results, beyond general propositions?

Visiting S.A. Armstrong Limited, Charles Armstrong showed me a desk pad depicting a three-circle IC model. Everyone in the company has access to this pad. He explained how distributing the pad to all employees makes them feel their input is welcomed and valued (transfer of human to structural capital), and that they should tap into customer knowledge to perfect their work (transfer of customer to human to structural capital), which affects the overall culture and management of the company. But when it came to the measurement system that Mr. Armstrong developed (attempting to measure the flows of value creation), he explained that it is impossible to implement. (On a humorous note, Mr. Armstrong made the remark that I am welcome to apply for a patent on the method.)

The IC models at best provide a tool to communicate the importance and value of IC through­out the organization, but fail to provide any guidance to business leaders and managers on how IC should be managed. It is true that the measurement systems took the IC model from the theoretical to the practical level by defining the outcomes and results that managers should aim for in managing IC. That may suffice if managing IC is considered as a defined procedure directed at achieving particular results, but it certainly is not sufficient to guide the development of a model for business management in the knowledge economy where IC makes 80 percent of business value. Attempting to define and manage IC without putting it in the context and reality of business management reduces the IC concept and models to an academic pursuit. ICM should be at the crux of business management and not a mere management tool. For that to happen, a comprehensive approach that matches between the elementary functions of business management and ICM is essential, hence the comprehensive approach to intellectual capital management (CICM), outlined in Chapter 4. But first let's explore the question of IC reporting.